And the Blaster Community Representative is...
By
AmericanSteel,
Posted on: 2006-01-21 17:46 in Blasters
Revolver_Law, I'm not asking you to be happy. But pardon me if I fail to see how your being hostile will benefit anyone.
And I apologize for failing to take your private communications with the Devs into consideration. I cite my lack of knowledge of their existence, which you pointed out.
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
Revolver_Law, I'm not asking you to be happy. But pardon me if I fail to see how your being hostile will benefit anyone.
[/ QUOTE ]
Being nice and polite certainly didn't get me anywhere. 
In all seriousness, I don't mean to come off that way but it is what it is. The Blaster community has been hung out to dry too many times. I'll be happy when I see changes. Hate to sound cliche, but talk is cheap. As proven so many times by Castle's co-workers.
I'll continue post problems and suggestions to fix them as I always have.
Eh. Castle, We all love you. And you've done quite a bit more than some folks would like to admit.. Frankly, I'm damn thankful you've stepped in to at least give explanations on why things happen to be the way they are. It definately aids in the great scheme to understand life, the universe, and everything.
[ QUOTE ]
..it means I get's put on the stack of things to do and someone other than me prioritizes them.
[/ QUOTE ]
I get's put on the stack all the time. <3334.
And if Castle WAS reading this thread, he certainly isn't anymore.
Revolver_Law = pessimist. Got it.
[ QUOTE ]
It's just very nice to have someone looking at things, even if it just ends up being passed on. We understand that issues like Defiance lag aren't really one-man fixes, but it's a very nice change.
EDIT: [ QUOTE ]
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you NUTS? Theres only one power with enhancable toxic resistance in the game, and a couple powersets that NEED to lethal defense to avoid being constantly stuck in place.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which ones were you missing, Unstoppable, Granite Armor, Unyeilding, Personal Force Field, Dark Embrace... should I go on?
[ QUOTE ]
The second requires new design, new code and would probably mean a direct nerf to all Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold attacks, since those resistance types are less common than Smashing, Lethal, Energy and Psionic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Err... do you mean that Psionic is more commonly resisted than Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold? Or that it is more commonly resisted than it should be given it's adjustments?
Let's Dance!
[ QUOTE ]
And if Castle WAS reading this thread, he certainly isn't anymore.
Revolver_Law = pessimist. Got it.
[/ QUOTE ]
If Devs stopped reading threads due to those angry with them then they'd never post at all.
BTW, Castle knew exactly how I felt about the matter way before he posted here.
Revolver Law != pessimist
Revolver Law == realist
[ QUOTE ]
Not as much of an inconvenience is an understatement. Must I go to Scrapper and Tank forums and quote the posts of "OMG SS IS TEH 1337", "MA OWNS!", etc? It's fact that their ability to mitigate damage overcomes any resistance mobs may have to their damage type. I'm not unfamiliar with melee ATs with lethal/smash - I'm quite experienced with them and know from personal experience it's a not an issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
The sheer quantity of smashing/lethal resistant enemies has been a tanker and scrapper complaint since the game launched. The fact that scrappers and tankers have defenses doesn't necessarily mean that they are immune to defeat ever, especially when fighting something that is very difficult to damage (CoT spectrals, for example, which exist well into the 30s).
This isn't a binary issue, where it's a massive problem for ATs without defenses and not a problem at all for ATs with defenses. I mean, I realize that it's popular to post as if scrappers and tankers are Chuck Norris or Vin Diesel at all times, but I think that's a highly idealized perspective mainly intended to magnify blaster problems.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Scrappers and Tanks have their problems, I'll give you that - but smash/lethal damage is not one of them.
I fail to see where being able to do double damage at any given time, along with a secondary meant to increase your longevity in battle doesn't offset any mob resistances to your damage type.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not as much of an inconvenience is an understatement. Must I go to Scrapper and Tank forums and quote the posts of "OMG SS IS TEH 1337", "MA OWNS!", etc? It's fact that their ability to mitigate damage overcomes any resistance mobs may have to their damage type. I'm not unfamiliar with melee ATs with lethal/smash - I'm quite experienced with them and know from personal experience it's a not an issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
The sheer quantity of smashing/lethal resistant enemies has been a tanker and scrapper complaint since the game launched. The fact that scrappers and tankers have defenses doesn't necessarily mean that they are immune to defeat ever, especially when fighting something that is very difficult to damage (CoT spectrals, for example, which exist well into the 30s).
This isn't a binary issue, where it's a massive problem for ATs without defenses and not a problem at all for ATs with defenses. I mean, I realize that it's popular to post as if scrappers and tankers are Chuck Norris or Vin Diesel at all times, but I think that's a highly idealized perspective mainly intended to magnify blaster problems.
[/ QUOTE ]
Its not a binary issue in more ways than one. I'm pretty sure the devs have suggested in the past that one of the balancing points between blasters and scrappers was the fact that, on average, blasters have less-resisted damage than scrappers. That would lend credence to the notion that AR is worth looking into, but conversely, the question isn't whether scrapper damage is heavily resisted, because its supposed to be. The question is whether its *too* heavily resisted, and also whether the smashing and lethal resistances are relatively even, or explicitly supposed to be uneven for other balancing reasons (i.e. does headsplitter and golden dragonfly hit harder than eagle's claw because - and I don't know this for a 100% fact - lethal is more resisted on average than smashing?).
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I always thought that Concern was the Blaster rep
It's great that _Castle_'s looking at what issues we've mustered together, but...
That really fails to address the issue I was raising here. Personally, I don't think Blasters have that many issues. Personally, I'm actually with that star-spangled guy wearing the tin hat--I think, for the most part, Blasters are more or less balanced, more or less "baseline". I know that makes people like hephaestus crazy (sorry, heph, but I know it does).
That said...
The current situation vis a vis the various ATs is out of balance and, I'll be blunt, I believe that's partly because certain ATs have had community representatives, who play those ATs and who know those ATs inside-and-out, going to bat for them.
And you know what? I think that's fine. That's great!
But...
We should ALL have someone who's in our corner pitching for us.
Over two months ago, Statesman said we'd all get our own Community Representatives. While I was cynical--much like Revolver Law, because I too have seen too many promises made but not kept--I hoped they'd keep that promise.
More than a one-time patch, I'd much, much rather have someone in our corner who's a self-described "min-maxing Power Gamer", who plays Blasters and knows them inside and out, stumping for us on a regular basis.
40062: The World's Worst PUG
84008: Jenkins's Guide to Super-Villainy
230187: The Hero of Kings Row
No H8 - 08.04.10
@Circuit Boy - Moderator - Pride global chat channel
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also keep in mind they're dealing with the loss of Lord Recluse (and it seems Mako as well) so they're going to be up to their neck just trying to keep up with the schedule.
[/ QUOTE ]
Mako is still here. He's just sequestered and more busy than you would really want to know about.
A quick note on what I can and cannot do.
I can fix data bugs. I can explain why some things work the way they do. I can even advocate changes to folks above me.
Programming bugs or changes, Animation bugs or changes, Power FX or Sound FX bus or changes and overall design philosophy are things I have to kick over to others 99% of the time. When that happens, it means I get's put on the stack of things to do and someone other than me prioritizes them.
A great example is the Assault Rifle Smashing/Lethal damage being overly resisted complaint. It is, however, a much more pandemic problem than just AR. Claws, Katana, Super Strength, Ice Blasters to a lesser extent, Mace, Axe and Broadsword all have the exact same complaint (I might have missed a couple, this was off the top of my head.) That means, it is something that needs to be addressed globally, and is not an AT specific issue.
Possible fixes include going through all the various critters in the game and adjusting their resistances, modifying the base damage values for powers based on the 'standard resistance index' (a term I just coined) or by modifying individual powers.
The first is a tremendous amount of work, which should probably be done at some point. I'd guess it would take me a full 5 weeks to do. The second requires new design, new code and would probably mean a direct nerf to all Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold attacks, since those resistance types are less common than Smashing, Lethal, Energy and Psionic. That means it would be unpopular with a large percentage of the playerbase. The third, and short term easiest version involves tweaking individual powers of effected sets -- which would almost certainly nerf some powers, buff others and cause a whole slew of new imbalances.
It's not as easy to get things done as you might think. 
[/ QUOTE ]
Ha! Tricked an answer out of a redname!
Seriously though, some better communication would be great on what rumors are shaping up to be a major upheaval within the devopment team there, and how said upheaval (if that's truly what it is, which I doubt) will effect our content.
Having played a Katana scrap to 50 and now, a MA scrap to 42, I will second Arcanaville's comment about S/L resists.
Smash is far less resisted, in my experience, than Lethal is.
Do I have hard #s? Nope. Just a few hundred hours and my own perceptions.
This might be beating a dead horse since it was a few pages back, but I think a good solution to the overly resisted lethal is to swap it's Defense Debuff with a Gradual Resistance debuff. Resistance buff/debuff was a field the devs didn't want to think about near launch, but lately with Sonic sets and Orange inspirations it makes alot more sense for AR, Weapons, and maybe even spines (despite the fact it already has a near-unresistable secondary damage type.)
[ QUOTE ]
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cuz lord knows, there's not enough Spines scrappers/stalkers as it is
This is your FauxPas of the year dude... CLAWS needs help, not Spines.
Why don't you just ask for them to buff Energy Melee while you're at it.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and I'm going to look at Blasters now that I've gone through the consolidated Defenders bug list. You guys got one?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll make it really easy for you...Defiance is teh suck (as the kids say).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
4. Finally Spines should be all toxic damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cuz lord knows, there's not enough Spines scrappers/stalkers as it is
This is your FauxPas of the year dude... CLAWS needs help, not Spines.
Why don't you just ask for them to buff Energy Melee while you're at it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, it does. I mean, TF + ET does more damage combined than the entire rest of the set. Obviously, the other attacks need to be brought up to par with those two.
Also, it kind of surprises me that no one has gone for the obvious and likely true answer: EvilGeko was having some fun.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I vote CuppaJo for blaster rep :P
Mister Weekly's BOOM box - Lvl 50 ar/FIRE/fire/
Hellion Girlfriend - EM/Stone brute
I have a few 50's...
[ QUOTE ]
I vote CuppaJo for blaster rep :P
[/ QUOTE ]
Me too! She was on her level 50 Fire/Fire blaster for the Caleb bugfix test on the test server, and she only had the first debt badge.
Now everyone else was yelling that she got PLed, but I think that she probably just know how to play her Fire/Fire.
Oh, and she had Hotfeet.
God knows why...
Arc Salvo: Okay hold one sec guys, we can't just rush in blindly vs these Nemesis, they've got these ranged aoe's tha-
Teammate1(charging in): Shut up, Arc Salvo, you lame*$% Viewtiful Joe wannabe! What do you know?!
Teammate2(also charging): yeah, ST#& arc salvo u PWR RANGR U!
Arc Salvo: *sigh*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A great example is the Assault Rifle Smashing/Lethal damage being overly resisted complaint. It is, however, a much more pandemic problem than just AR. Claws, Katana, Super Strength, Ice Blasters to a lesser extent, Mace, Axe and Broadsword all have the exact same complaint (I might have missed a couple, this was off the top of my head.) That means, it is something that needs to be addressed globally, and is not an AT specific issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to disagree. Other ATs with the lethal/smash problems all have ways to mitigate incoming damage - Blasters do not. My Claws Scrapper has zero difficulty due to lethal damage because he's not in such a hurry to kill. He's able to stand toe-to-toe while my Blaster is forced to kill quickly because he can't manage incoming damage. This is why the lethal problem is so huge - it henders a Blaster's ability to kill quickly, thus increasing the chance of death.
I can't remember the last time I've had anybody I know who plays an SS Tank (or Brute for that matter) complain about lack of damage. In fact if you read most of the threads concerning SS, it's about the enormous amount of damage they are able to do - not a lack thereof.
The only melee AT that has problems with smash/lethal is Mace, I know this from personal experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Having trouble against S/L Damage? You have options. Take Tough and T.I. and Force of Nature in your Epic Power Pools. Without Force of Nature you can still achieve over 50% Resistance to S/L attacks, and with Force you can cap it. That's why PvP will remain unbalanced in the end game.
[ QUOTE ]
I think the point was that Psi was less common than the other types noted. As far as how much "less" is certainly up for interpretation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is he? let's look at what he said one more time.
[ QUOTE ]
The second requires new design, new code and would probably mean a direct nerf to all Negative Energy, Fire, and Cold attacks, since those resistance types are less common than Smashing, Lethal, Energy and Psionic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Highlighted for your convenience, I think it's safe to say he meant that the resistance to negatie energy is less common than to psionic damage, among other things.
[ QUOTE ]
With regard to the 'promise' of a Blaster Rep, with the news that has come out of late, I would consider ourselves lucky indeed that we have an overworked man such as Castle having the time to even look at some of these issues that the community has raised.
Perhaps it is too much to ask that a different 'Rep' be assigned to the 11 different AT's in CoX. Perhaps we could be slightly less snide, snarky and rude to the guy who is actually doing some good work for us ....
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry if i haven't made myself clear before, my scepticism isn't directed at Castle.
As for Castle being overworked, that's something he must've pm-ed to you, because, as far as I know he never said such thing on the boards, unless he secretly is also Mako....
Saying it's too much to ask for a representative for each archtype is a load of bull, the idea was brought up by Statesman himself and so far they haven't made good on it.
As for that snide snarky and rude comment. I admit to my posts being snarky, my temper has severely shortened the last couple of days. But rude and snide... we read thing differently, that's for sure.
how about this solution:
make all attacks do a random attack / damage type in pvp.
might be smash, might be lethal, might be cold, whatever.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A great example is the Assault Rifle Smashing/Lethal damage being overly resisted complaint. It is, however, a much more pandemic problem than just AR. Claws, Katana, Super Strength, Ice Blasters to a lesser extent, Mace, Axe and Broadsword all have the exact same complaint (I might have missed a couple, this was off the top of my head.) That means, it is something that needs to be addressed globally, and is not an AT specific issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to disagree. Other ATs with the lethal/smash problems all have ways to mitigate incoming damage - Blasters do not. My Claws Scrapper has zero difficulty due to lethal damage because he's not in such a hurry to kill. He's able to stand toe-to-toe while my Blaster is forced to kill quickly because he can't manage incoming damage. This is why the lethal problem is so huge - it henders a Blaster's ability to kill quickly, thus increasing the chance of death.
I can't remember the last time I've had anybody I know who plays an SS Tank (or Brute for that matter) complain about lack of damage. In fact if you read most of the threads concerning SS, it's about the enormous amount of damage they are able to do - not a lack thereof.
The only melee AT that has problems with smash/lethal is Mace, I know this from personal experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Having trouble against S/L Damage? You have options. Take Tough and T.I. and Force of Nature in your Epic Power Pools. Without Force of Nature you can still achieve over 50% Resistance to S/L attacks, and with Force you can cap it. That's why PvP will remain unbalanced in the end game.
[/ QUOTE ]
We're not talking about our defense and res, we're talking about the res that mobs have to that type of damage. I'm well aware of Force Mastery and Fighting pools.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He posted that Scrappers and Tanks have the same lethal/smash problems AR and Archery do and anybody whose played AR or Archery and lethal/smash based Scrapper/Tank knows that to be completely false for a number of reasons already stated.
I'm not being negative towards him, I'm telling him that player experience has shown that his train of thought was off.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do not think it is "completely false." It is better stated that it is not as much of an inconvenience to melee ATs. Blasters don't need to claim every balance problem as applying uniquely to them to actually have valid problems.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not as much of an inconvenience is an understatement. Must I go to Scrapper and Tank forums and quote the posts of "OMG SS IS TEH 1337", "MA OWNS!", etc? It's fact that their ability to mitigate damage overcomes any resistance mobs may have to their damage type. I'm not unfamiliar with melee ATs with lethal/smash - I'm quite experienced with them and know from personal experience it's a not an issue.